Author: Jonathan Neville

Uncategorized

M2C Technique 4. Noah’s flood – Imprinting the M2C theory on the minds of vulnerable students and missionaries

Technique 4. Imprinting the M2C theory on the minds of vulnerable students and missionaries (and investigators) through media, artwork, displays, and academic publications.

The easy antidote for M2C is education about Letter VII and the teachings of the prophets. That can be augmented by education about the relevant archaeology, anthropology, geography, geology, etc.

But the M2C intellectuals have erected a strong barrier to acceptance of the prophets. This post gives some examples.

Next week I’m going to announce the recipient of the 2017 Benjamin Winchester award, so I’ll save that remarkable body of work for that announcement. But here, let’s review a few examples of imprinting.
_____

Some people think that the reason for Noah’s flood was that the world had become so corrupt that children being born had no chance to choose; i.e., they were surrounded with evil with no hope of seeing examples or hearing teachings of righteousness.

I think we’re about at that point in the Church where children growing up will never know what the prophets have taught about the Hill Cumorah in New York.

Children born today will not even have the opportunity to choose to follow the prophets because they are indoctrinated into M2C from a very early age.

When they move on to high school, M2C is reinforced through Seminary, and then they encounter M2C at Institute/BYU, and then again at the MTC.

If/when the youth discover on their own what the prophets have taught, and that their teachers have rejected those teachings, it will cause a serious faith crisis. We all know this; the prophets have warned us about it.

But the M2C intellectuals don’t care because they value their own learning and status over the teachings of the prophets.
_____

M2C proponents know that visual persuasion is more effective than verbal or written persuasion. People remember photos and artistic depictions more than words on a page or even sermons. Letter VII and the other teachings of the prophets don’t stand a chance compared with the clever and insidious M2C visual persuasion.

Once imprinted, especially when imprinted at an early age, the M2C interpretation of the Book of Mormon becomes indelible. It creates a bias that the child will continue to confirm through adulthood.
_____

Let’s start with The Book of Mormon for Young Readers by Kelli Coughanour. This one is one of the most egregious examples of indoctrination that I know of.

Lately, this book has ranked #5 on Deseret Book’s list of bestselling titles.

The Church’s Intellectual Property Office allowed Coughanour to use the current edition of the Book of Mormon text, many quotations from the General Authorities, and lots of M2C images owned by the Church.

It’s all part of the M2C indoctrination program.

Dedicating Mesoamerica to children 

Nowhere in this book will you find the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah.

The interior of the book features several maps of Mesoamerica to teach children where the events took place.

As you look at these maps and illustrations below, ask yourself if the children who read this book will have any realistic chance of eventually accepting what the prophets have taught about the New York Cumorah.

The answer, of course, is no. These maps, seamlessly blended with the “approved” artwork depicting Mesoamerica that the children will see in Primary, Sunday School, Seminary, Institute, BYU, the MTC, etc., will make it effectively impossible for them to even conceive of the Book of Mormon in another location.

They will reject the teachings of the prophets about Cumorah as surely as do the M2C intellectuals.

Or, more likely, when they learn what the prophets have taught (Letter VII, etc.) and realize their teachers have been training them all along to disbelieve the prophets, they will question everything the prophets have taught.

Teaching Mesoamerica

Teaching the River Sidon in Mesoamerica

Teaching Zarahemla in Mesoamerica

Teaching that Cumorah is not in New York
Close-up of Cumorah in Mesoamerica

 _____

As we’ve seen, the M2C proponents managed to change the artwork in the missionary editions of the Book of Mormon to teach M2C directly to investigators.

Visual persuasion explains why the two-Cumorahs displays in the visitors centers are so effective. The M2C exhibits subliminally teach millions of people every year about M2C.

The technique is so subtle that I’ve raised this with Church leaders who denied they were teaching the two-Cumorahs theory until I walked them through the exhibits in detail and pointed out they are depicting Mormon abridging the plates in the depository of records (Mormon 6:6) while surrounded by Mayan iconography. Meanwhile, Moroni is off in the distance, all alone at “the hill in New York.”.

Perhaps the most notorious artwork is the painting of Christ visiting the Americas. I call it “Christ at Chichen Itza.”

The painting is ubiquitous, but nowhere more so than in Palmyra. It is on display in the Hill Cumorah visitors center, the Grandin Building, and in at least three places in the Palmyra chapel itself.

The painting has imprinted M2C on the minds of most LDS in the world at this point. Hats off to the M2C proponents for effectively brainwashing members of the Church with this artwork. Now, few members can read the Book of Mormon without picturing this scene in their minds.

This artwork is just one example of how effective the Academic Cycle has been:

We start with the M2C citation cartel, which repudiates the prophets about the New York Cumorah.

They teach students at BYU/CES about M2C, using the fantasy maps along with the M2C artwork to firmly imprint M2C on the minds of the students.

The students then become artists, authors, researchers, and Church employees. In their careers, these M2C followers create even more M2C art, media, displays, etc.

Then the M2C citation cartel uses the M2C art, media, displays, etc. to “prove” M2C was correct in the first place.

As I’ve pointed out, even the MTC is using M2C artwork to reinforce M2C in the minds of the missionaries. The unsuspecting missionaries never learn that M2C contradicts the teachings of many of the men after whom the MTC buildings were named! See
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2017/11/confusing-messages-at-mtc.html
_____

Again, the easy antidote for M2C is education about Letter VII and the teachings of the prophets. But educating people is much more difficult when you have to overcome decades of imprinting.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Technique 3. Causing confusion by conflating separate and distinct teachings of the prophets.

Technique 3. Causing confusion by conflating separate and distinct teachings of the prophets.

There is a clear distinction between the teachings of the prophets on two topics:

(i) they have consistently, specifically, and persistently taught that the hill Cumorah (Mormon 6:6) is in western New York.

(ii) they have consistently, specifically, and persistently taught that the rest of the Book of Mormon geography has not yet been settled.

How do the M2C proponents get around this obvious problem for their theory?

They cause confusion by conflating the two separate issues. That is, they cite the teachings of the prophets about the uncertainty of the rest of Book of Mormon geography and claim those teachings also apply to the Hill Cumorah.

It’s easy to see through this subterfuge, but so many people want to believe M2C–they want their M2C bias to be confirmed–that they eagerly accept the confusion.

FairMormon is one of the best at using this tactic effectively to confuse members and Church leaders. You can search this blog for “FairMormon” and see lots of examples.

Because of the confusion caused by M2C, you will often hear such arguments as this: “Mesoamerica, North America, Chile, Baja–they all have their pros and cons, but the prophets have never been specific, so the geography doesn’t matter.”

Of course, it’s not true that the prophets have not been specific about Cumorah.

You can cite Letter VII and all the other specific, prophetic teachings about the New York Cumorah to M2C proponents, but it won’t make any difference. They are convinced that the prophets have left it up to the intellectuals–meaning, themselves and the entire M2C citation cartel of FairMormon, BOMC, BYU Studies, etc.–to solve the question of geography.

They will continue to confirm their bias regardless of what the prophets say.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

M2C Technique 2. Using sophistry to teach the prophets are wrong.

Technique 2. Using sophistry to teach the prophets are wrong.

If you confront an M2C promoter with Letter VII, the usual first response is disbelief. They have never been told about Letter VII and they won’t believe you are giving them a legitimate document. That’s why I pinned the link to the Joseph Smith papers at the top of my Letter VII blog.
http://www.lettervii.com/

When they discover that Letter VII was consistently and widely taught during Joseph Smith’s lifetime (Letter VII was even published in New York City two days after the martyrdom), the M2C believers typically become defensive. They consult their M2C references such as BYU M2C Studies and Book of Mormon Central America. They call their thought-leaders.

Eventually, they will address their cognitive dissonance by claiming that the New York Cumorah was merely speculation on the part of Oliver Cowdery. It was his opinion, they will say. We have to trust the scholars and the intellectuals who are experts in this field. There’s a scholarly consensus that Cumorah is in Mexico. Hence, there are two Cumorahs; i.e., M2C.

You can remind them of what President Benson said about the “mere opinion” rationalization, but they won’t care because they don’t like a lot of what President Benson taught.

President Benson: The learned may feel the prophet is only inspired when he agrees with them, otherwise the prophet is just giving his opinion—speaking as a man…

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-ezra-taft-benson/chapter-11-follow-the-living-prophet?lang=eng

In the early days of this blog I focused on the M2C sophistry and semantic arguments because I wanted to point out the logical fallacies and sleight of hand the M2C intellectuals were using. Back then, I thought they were persuading people. Now I realize they were engaged purely in confirmation bias. Nobody would fall for their sophistry except those who wanted to.

You can go back and read some from 2015 to get an idea if you are concerned about some of the M2C arguments and how they sought to undermine the credibility and reliability of Joseph Smith and the Three Witnesses (and anyone else who taught the New York Cumorah).

The real problem of M2C, IMO, is how it acts as a gateway drug for sincere members of the Church to begin doubting the credibility and reliability of the prophets. When it is your own seminary, institute, and BYU teacher who is telling you the prophets are wrong about the New York Cumorah, it is far easier to believe they are wrong about other things.

And I think we all know where the intellectuals are leading us.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

[fts_facebook type=page id=moronisamerica posts=6 posts_displayed=page_only]

Uncategorized

M2C technique 1. Suppressing and censoring the words of the prophets.

The other day I listed five techniques used by M2C* intellectuals to advance their theories. I was going to summarize them in one post, but instead I’m breaking it up into five shorter posts.

By using these techniques, the M2C intellectuals are systematically dismantling the best evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon–evidence consistently taught by modern prophets. 

The M2C intellectuals are leaving members (and investigators) with a choice between 

(i) a delusional Mesoamerican setting based on illusory “correspondences” between Mayan culture and the M2C interpretation of the text of the Book of Mormon, and 

(ii) the fantasy map setting currently being taught by CES/BYU that portrays the Book of Mormon as fiction.

This is a choice no member of the Church (or investigator) should have to make, because both choices repudiate the teachings of the prophets. Nevertheless, that’s what is going on.

Let’s see how this is being accomplished.

Technique 1. Suppressing and censoring the words of the prophets. 

The M2C intellectuals know that most members of the Church would accept the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah if they knew about these teachings. The intellectuals solve this potential risk to M2C by suppressing and censoring the words of the prophets.

This is not a new tactic. Like the M2C intellectuals, the Lamanites were constantly seeking to destroy the records of the teachings of the prophets.

Enos observed of the Lamanites that “they swore in their wrath that, if it were possible, they would destroy our records and us, and also all the traditions of our fathers.” (Enos 1:14)

Mormon wrote, “having been commanded of the Lord that I should not suffer the records which had been handed down by our fathers, which were sacred, to fall into the hands of the Lamanites, (for the Lamanites would destroy them) therefore I made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord.” 
(Mormon 6:6)

Today, it is the M2C intellectuals who seek to destroy the records of the teachings of the prophets about the New York Hill Cumorah.

Recall that when Joseph Smith was alive, everyone knew Cumorah was in New York because Letter VII was so widely re-published in Church publications. The New York Cumorah was taught in Articles of Faith, the book by James E. Talmage that was published by the Church itself. It was taught in A Marvelous Work and a Wonder by LeGrand Richards. These books were included in the approved reading list for missionaries.

In the 1930s, when M2C was first advocated, Apostle and Church Historian Joseph Fielding Smith observed that M2C sought to put Cumorah in Central America “notwithstanding the teachings of the Church to the contrary for upwards of 100 years.” Notice, he said “the teachings of the Church,” not the isolated musings or speculative opinion of Oliver Cowdery. President Smith reiterated that observation when he was President of the Quorum of the Twelve.

The New York Cumorah was specifically taught in General Conference several times, including in 1975 and 1978.

Alma wrote, “it has hitherto been wisdom in God that these things should be preserved; for behold, they have enlarged the memory of this people, yea, and convinced many of the error of their ways.” (Alma 37:8) Letter VII and the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah would serve the same purpose today if they were well-known to Church members.

In recent years, however, references to the New York Cumorah have been purged from Church media, curriculum, visitors centers etc.

Pre-1981: Mormon and Moroni
together at he New York Cumorah
Post 1981:
Moroni alone in New York

For example, starting in 1961, the missionary editions of the Book of Mormon included photos of the hill Cumorah in New York and the Arnold Friberg painting of Mormon and Moroni together on the Hill Cumorah in New York.

In 1981, these illustrations were replaced replaced with the painting of Moroni alone at the hill, putting the plates in the stone box, which fits the M2C narrative.

I discussed this change in more detail here:
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2017/05/expectations-and-art-missionary-work.html

Look through recent LDS publications and see if you can find any references to Letter VII or the New York hill Cumorah. Go through the visitors centers and search for the teachings of the prophets about Cumorah. You won’t find them anywhere.

The Missionary Department deleted Articles of Faith and A Marvelous Work and a Wonder from the approved reading list.

BYU fantasy map of the
Book of Mormon

The New York Cumorah has been purged from Seminary and Institute manuals, replaced with the fantasy map of the Book of Mormon that depicts the scriptures as fictional.

BYU has done the same. Students at BYU taking the required Book of Mormon classes learn the fantasy map but never hear about Letter VII or the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah. If they ask about the New York Cumorah, they are told those teachings are merely the “opinions” of the prophets, but those opinions are wrong because the scholars know better.

Most teachers throughout the Church, from Primary through Gospel Doctrine, will give the same answers if asked about Letter VII because they get their information from BYU Studies, FairMormon, Meridian Magazine, and the rest of the M2C citation cartel.

Consequently, future generations will have no idea how consistently and specifically the prophets taught that Cumorah was in New York.

But it is not only the New York Cumorah that is being suppressed and censored. Another egregious example is the lesson manual Teachings of the Presidents of the Church–Joseph Smith. I’ve explained before how the Curriculum Committee deleted key passages from the Wentworth letter because these passages refute M2C. See here.

Future generations of Church members will refer primarily to this lesson manual to learn what Joseph Smith taught. Even if they notice the edits, most will never inquire about what was deleted.

I discussed the importance of this omission here: http://www.lettervii.com/2016/08/letter-vii-in-histories-volume-1.html
_____

In the age of the Internet, the systematic M2C effort to suppress and censor Letter VII is doomed to fail. 

While the M2C suppression efforts mean that fewer and fewer members of the Church will learn at Church what the prophets have taught about the New York Hill Cumorah, they will learn about it through other means. Letter VII is in the Joseph Smith Papers. The conference reports are available online. Articles of Faith and A Marvelous Work and a Wonder are still available.

In mere seconds, Internet searches reveal the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah that people no longer learn in Church.

The M2C censorship initiatives are counterproductive. They feed the narrative that the Church hides its history.

The tragedy of this is, the New York Cumorah is consistent with archaeology, anthropology, geology, geography, and the words of the text of the Book of Mormon itself. 
_____

Suppressing the words of the prophets is a serious problem in principle, but it is aggravated in this case because the M2C intellectuals are replacing the words of the prophets with their own M2C ideology.

When we compare the teachings of the prophets with the teachings of the M2C intellectuals, we should remember what President Benson taught:

Sometimes there are those who feel their earthly knowledge on a certain subject is superior to the heavenly knowledge which God gives to his prophet on the same subject. They feel the prophet must have the same earthly credentials or training which they have had before they will accept anything the prophet has to say that might contradict their earthly schooling. How much earthly schooling did Joseph Smith have? Yet he gave revelations on all kinds of subjects. … We encourage earthly knowledge in many areas, but remember if there is ever a conflict between earthly knowledge and the words of the prophet, you stand with the prophet and you’ll be blessed and time will show you have done the right thing…

The learned may feel the prophet is only inspired when he agrees with them, otherwise the prophet is just giving his opinion—speaking as a man. The rich may feel they have no need to take counsel of a lowly prophet. …

… The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.


As a prophet reveals the truth it divides the people. The honest in heart heed his words but the unrighteous either ignore the prophet or fight him.

_____
*M2C is the acronym for the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory that claims the New York Cumorah is a false tradition while the “real” Cumorah of Mormon 6:6 and the hill Ramah of Ether 15:11 is somewhere in southern Mexico. The two-Cumorahs theory is necessary for the limited Mesoamerican geography promoted by CES/BYU and Church staff, which has never been taught by the prophets. Instead, M2C contradicts the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Upcoming BOMC conference to promote M2C

There are two conferences scheduled in April that focus on the Book of Mormon from two different perspectives: the New York Cumorah vs M2C (Mesoamerica/Two-Cumorahs). Today we’ll look at the M2C conference because the presenters will demonstrate many of the techniques I’m discussing this week.

New York Cumorah. The Firm Foundation Expo is April 5-7 at the Davis County Conference Center. There are over 60 speakers scheduled from 9-9 each day in six different rooms. This works out to something around 120 separate presentations on a variety of topics.
Cost: $30.
Attendance: several thousand people.
M2C. The Book of Mormon Central (BOMC) conference is April 7 at the Utah Valley Convention Center. It goes from 9 to 5:15 and has 10 presentations.
Cost: $35. 
Attendance: a few hundred people.
I know most of the presenters at both of these conferences. Every one of them is awesome. They are good, smart people, and faithful members of the Church (except for a few non-LDS speakers, who are also good, faithful people). I have great respect for each one of them.

I would be happy to speak and participate at either or both conferences, but I was only invited to speak at the Firm Foundation.  

For me, the choice is easy even if I wasn’t speaking, because the M2C conference is entirely predictable. They will be trying to persuade people to disbelieve the prophets about the New York Cumorah, but I don’t think their efforts are succeeding no matter how many BYU professors they line up.
While there are some good non-M2C presenters at the M2C conference, that conference is essentially a chance to see for yourself how many techniques the intellectuals use to promote M2C.
_____
Let’s start with the BOMC logo. This is the logo from the old FARMS (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) that BOMC adopted. The logo represents the four languages and cultures that BOMC focuses on: Hebrew, Egyptian, Greek, and Mayan. 
I used to love FARMS. I read their publications, attended their presentations, etc. I was fully persuaded by their promotion of M2C. 
Over time it degenerated into “mean-spirited polemics” that led me to reconsider my previous acceptance of what they promoted. Looking back, it is apparent to me now that the whole focus on M2C was a mistake from the outset, and yet BOMC continues the FARMS legacy of M2C by using the same logo.

Like FARMS, BOMC is anything but neutral in its approach to the Book of Mormon. It promotes M2C exclusively and refuses to allow side-by-side comparisons of different geographical and cultural models. It refuses to even acknowledge alternative perspectives (such as the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah). Lately, it has “branched out” to allow consideration of BYU’s fantasy map, which teaches students that the Book of Mormon is fiction.

For these reasons, the only honest name for Book of Mormon Central is Book of Mormon Central America.
_____
Now, let’s look at the M2C program. Obviously, my comments are merely my own opinions based on past experience. We could always be surprised and find BOMC supporting the teachings of the prophets instead of ridiculing and repudiating them as they have been doing up to now. If that happens, we’ll discuss it in the blog.
1. BMC Staff – Book of Mormon Central: A Year in Review
BOMC has put out some wonderful materials that help readers and viewers understand many aspects of the Book of Mormon. But they have also incessantly promoted M2C. Mesomania infects everything BOMC does, to their choice of archiving material to the “Kno-Why” series they produce. In my view, their repudiation of the prophets’ teachings about the New York Cumorah outweighs the otherwise good material they offer. You will see plenty of examples in this review.
2. Matt Roper & Paul Fields – Abinadi to Zenos…28 speakers in the Book of Mormon
This will be one of the best examples of confirmation bias you will ever see. Brothers Roper and Fields have been offering what I call “black box” stylometry studies for several years now. I say “black box” because they only show the results, never the methods, assumptions, or even database they use. (My past requests for such detail have been declined.) Consequently, their results are not replicable. But if you share their bias, you can be sure it will be confirmed during their presentation.

I imagine most of us want to believe there are 28 different speakers in the Book of Mormon, so it should be a fine presentation. And at least this time, we know what database they are using.

Brother Roper wrote the M2C article in BYU (M2C) Studies about which I commented here: 
3. Mark Wright, BYU Ancient Scripture – “In the Fields and in the Forests”: Mesoamerican Ecology and Cosmology in the Book of Mormon
This will be interesting and informative because Brother Wright is an excellent presenter, but it will be just another example of illusory correspondences between the Mayans and the Book of Mormon. Brother Wright has been one of the most reasonable and rational M2C promoters, but, IIRC, he’s one who has said he “can’t unsee” Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon, and that bias is evident in his work. He wrote an excellent article a while back, claiming that Mesoamerica is the “core” of Book of Mormon geography and North America is the “hinterlands.” It was a great insight, except IMO he got it backward; i.e., North America is the core, and Mesoamerica is the “hinterlands” where Lamanite descendants migrated/intermarried after 400 A.D.. I commented on this back in 2014 here: 
4. Rob Jex, LDS Church Priesthood and Family Department – Book of Mormon Videos. 
This should be one of the non-M2C presentations. That said, IIRC, Brother Jex at one time promoted the Baja theory (http://www.bofmmodel.org/study/), which also rejects the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah. I don’t know his current views about Cumorah. 
5. John Bytheway, LDS Author – Experiencing the Book of Mormon in the Garden
Probably great, also untainted by M2C.
6. Father Lehi Award to Clate and Carol Mask. 
Brother Mask is a long-time M2C advocate. He’s on the Advisory Board of BMAF, the owners of BOMC. 
BMAF is the group whose mission statement is “to increase understanding of the Book of Mormon as an ancient Mesoamerican codex.” 
This group expressly repudiates the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah. 
Brother Mask has given many years of commendable service in Central America, but like many people who live and server there, he promotes M2C and rejects Letter VII and the prophets.
7. John W. Welch, BYU Law School – April 7th and the Commencement of the Translation of the Book of Mormon
This looks to be a shortened version of Brother Welch’s excellent presentation about the translation from a few months ago, which I discussed here:
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2017/12/opening-heavens-but-censoring-history.html

This is the presentation in which Brother Welch discussed the timeline of the translation, but because Brother Welch promotes M2C, he censors the critical encounter between David Whitmer and the messenger taking the plates to the Hill Cumorah. 

The M2C people have no explanation for why the messenger would be taking the Harmony plates to Cumorah because they have convinced themselves that (i) there was only one set of plates (ii) the “real Cumorah” is in Mexico, and (iii) the “hill in New York” is merely the place where Moroni put the plates in a stone box. Their explanation for David Whitmer’s account is that David was mistaken, confused, senile, or was repeating the false Cumorah tradition created and promulgated by Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery.

Brother Welch always does a fine presentation, with good detail and analysis of the facts. He is also the Editor-in-Chief of BYU Studies, AKA BYU M2C Studies. The home page links to a map of Mesoamerica as the only “plausible” setting for the Book of Mormon. The best one shows the “plausible” locations of the final battles in southern Mexico, with Cumorah as a mountain near the coast of the Gulf of Mexico: https://byustudies.byu.edu/charts/159-plausible-locations-final-battles.

The work of the M2C intellectuals explains why the Hill Cumorah Visitors Center near Palmyra does not even inform visitors of what the prophets have taught about the Hill Cumorah. 
Needless to say, Brother Welch will not discuss the two sets of plates, the depository, or Letter VII.

Ironically, I’ll also be discussing the translation of the Book of Mormon on April 7th, but at the FIRM conference. Unlike presenters at the M2C conference, I’ll be supporting the teachings of the prophets about Cumorah.

8. Gerrit Dirkmaat, BYU Church History – The Printing of the Book of Mormon
This should be an informative presentation. Brother Dirkmaat probably won’t venture into the question of geography, but IIRC, he has tried to explain why no one should believe Letter VII. 
9. Jo Ann Seely, BYU Ancient Scripture – Lehi’s Jerusalem
Surely a fascinating presentation on Jerusalem, with no implications for M2C.
10. Tyler Griffin, BYU Ancient Scripture – Book of Mormon Geography: A powerful backdrop to the book’s message
BYU fantasy map that teaches the prophets are wrong
Brother Griffin is a consultant to BOMC and teaches Book of Mormon classes at BYU. He is one of the developers and promoters of the BYU fantasy map of the Book of Mormon. 
The map places Cumorah in a location (at the top of the map to the left here) that is as different from New York as possible.

The reason: this fantasy map is based on the M2C interpretation of the text, but apparently the faculty aren’t supposed to relate the Book of Mormon to any real-world location, so instead they teach the students by using a fantasy world.

I consider this map to be a return to the anti-Mormon claims of Mormonism Unvailed that the Book of Mormon is fiction. It was partly the book that President Cowdery was refuting with facts when he wrote and published his Gospel Topics essays, including Letter VII, all the way back in 1835. But today, instead of using the facts related by President Cowdery, these M2C intellectuals teach students to disbelieve those facts.
If you ever get a chance, ask Brother Griffin what he thinks about Letter VII. He usually says that (i) it was never canonized, (ii) it was merely Oliver’s personal opinion, and (iii) Oliver was wrong because of M2C.
If you ask him about all the other prophets who have taught that Cumorah is in New York, he usually says those Brethren were also wrong. They were merely expressing their personal opinions, but modern M2C scholars have determined they were mistaken. They were speaking according to their “best understanding at the time.” He will say that even when members of the First Presidency declared in General Conference that Cumorah is in New York, they were merely expressing their own incorrect opinions. He will also say that Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and Wilford Woodruff were wrong about President Cowdery visiting Mormon’s depository in the Hill Cumorah.
When you hear these M2C rationalizations, remember what President Ezra Taft Benson taught:
We encourage earthly knowledge in many areas, but remember if there is ever a conflict between earthly knowledge and the words of the prophet, you stand with the prophet and you’ll be blessed and time will show you have done the right thing….

The learned may feel the prophet is only inspired when he agrees with them, otherwise the prophet is just giving his opinion—speaking as a man…

As a prophet reveals the truth it divides the people. The honest in heart heed his words but the unrighteous either ignore the prophet or fight him….
_____

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Why don’t the Brethren…

One of the most persistent questions people ask me about M2C* is, “Why don’t the Brethren resolve this Cumorah issue?”
I can’t speak for anyone else, and certainly not for the Brethren, but my response has three parts.
First, I ask, “What makes you think they haven’t resolved the Cumorah issue?”
Second, I ask, “How many times do the Brethren have to declare something before you will believe them?”
Finally, I ask, “Do you think the Brethren today have any intention of repudiating their predecessors just because the M2C intellectuals have?” 
I don’t see why any Church leader should feel obligated to reiterate the clear, definitive teachings of prior prophets just because a few intellectuals have repudiated those teachings. That said, members of the Church are confused because M2C is depicted so widely in Church media, artwork, visitors centers, and curriculum.

But the Brethren always urge us to focus on the scriptures and the teachings of their predecessors, not the teachings of intellectuals.

We’ll briefly address each point below, but first let’s look at a problem directly related to this issue of Cumorah.
_____

Jana Riess did a survey of Millennials, asking why they left the Church. Tied for first was this reason: “I did not trust the Church leadership to tell the truth surrounding controversial or historical issues.”

This is a broad statement, and there are many possible applications of it. But why would Millennials think Church leadership has not told the truth?
BYU fantasy map of the Book of Mormon
which teaches students that the prophets are wrong
The most obvious reason is because our CES/BYU faculty have been teaching the youth that the prophets are wrong. 

Think a moment: If you’re a teenager in seminary or a college student in Institute or at a BYU campus and your CES/BYU teacher tells you the prophets are wrong about the New York Cumorah, what conclusion would you reach about the credibility of the prophets?

It is these M2C intellectuals and their followers in CES/BYU who are the ones teaching the Millennials not to trust Church leadership.
Sure, out of one side of their mouths they emphasize the importance of following the prophets. But when it comes to the Book of Mormon, and specifically the Hill Cumorah, they teach their students that the prophets are wrong.

And these same teachers try to avoid the problem by suppressing Letter VII and the other teachings of the prophets–which is exactly the problem that the Millennials cited as the reason they left the Church.

Many people claim the Cumorah issue is not important, but you don’t have to spend more than a minute on the Internet to discover the deep chasm between the teachings of the prophets and the teachings of the M2C intellectuals on this point. E.g., http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/cumorah.htm

We can pretend the youth (and the missionaries) are unaware of the issue, but that’s self-delusion of major proportions. 

Because the Book of Mormon is the keystone of our religion, and “all the Church stands or falls with the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon,” there is no more important question than what the Church teaches about the Book of Mormon itself.

The New York Cumorah has become a controversial issue purely because the M2C intellectuals have persuaded so many members of the Church that the prophets were wrong. In recent years, the New York Cumorah (and Letter VII) have been almost completely censored from Church curriculum, media, artwork, visitors centers, etc. This is a result of the concerted and determined effort of M2C believers, not because of anything the prophets have said.

In my view, Church leaders have consistently told the truth about the New York Cumorah. It is the M2C intellectuals who have obscured these teachings, contested them, and outright repudiated them. 

Consider President Ezra Taft Benson’s comments on prophets vs. intellectuals:

Sometimes there are those who feel their earthly knowledge on a certain subject is superior to the heavenly knowledge which God gives to his prophet on the same subject. They feel the prophet must have the same earthly credentials or training which they have had before they will accept anything the prophet has to say that might contradict their earthly schooling. How much earthly schooling did Joseph Smith have? Yet he gave revelations on all kinds of subjects. … We encourage earthly knowledge in many areas, but remember if there is ever a conflict between earthly knowledge and the words of the prophet, you stand with the prophet and you’ll be blessed and time will show you have done the right thing….

The learned may feel the prophet is only inspired when he agrees with them, otherwise the prophet is just giving his opinion—speaking as a man…

As a prophet reveals the truth it divides the people. The honest in heart heed his words but the unrighteous either ignore the prophet or fight him….

As members of the Church we have some close quarters to pass through if we are going to get home safely. We will be given a chance to choose between conflicting counsel given by some. That’s why we must learn—and the sooner we learn, the better—to keep our eye on the Prophet, the President of the Church.

There is definitely a major conflict between the earthly knowledge of the M2C intellectuals and the words of the prophets regarding the Hill Cumorah. The M2C intellectuals actually make the argument President Benson identified when they say President Cowdery and all the other prophets were “just giving [their] opinions.” 

The question for us is, do we stand with the intellectuals or with the prophets?

Now, back to our questions.
_____
1. What makes you think they haven’t resolved the Cumorah issue?
It is not possible to write a description of Cumorah and its significance that is more clear and unambiguous than what President Cowdery wrote in Letter VII. Recently I posted excerpts here,
At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the former, leaving a beautiful vale between. The soil is of the first quality for the country, and under a state of cultivation, which gives a prospect at once imposing, when one reflects on the fact, that here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed.
This statement alone definitely resolves the location of the Hill Cumorah. It is the same hill in Western New York where Joseph found the original plates in Moroni’s box made of stone and cement. To remove any uncertainty, President Cowdery quotes directly from the text itself.
2. How many times do the Brethren have to declare the New York Cumorah before you will believe them?
This is not a rhetorical question. We would very much like the M2C intellectuals to explain how many times the New York Cumorah has to be taught by the prophets before they will accept it. I suspect it doesn’t matter how many times, because the M2C ideology rejects prophetic direction in the first place. But let’s at least examine the point.
If Letter VII had been an isolated statement, published only in the 1835 Messenger and Advocate, maybe we could chalk it up to President Cowdery’s personal speculation. But as we all know by now, it was not isolated. Joseph had his scribes copy it into his personal history, where you can read it now in the Joseph Smith Papers. He approved republication of Letter VII in the Gospel Reflector and Times and Seasons, and, apparently, in the Millennial Star and the Prophet. 
Joseph F. Smith later republished it again in the Improvement Era. Letter VII has been cited with approval and its teaching about the New York Cumorah repeated by many prophets over the years, including by members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference. 
Few books have been published by the Church itself, but one of them, Article of Faith by Elder James E. Talmage, definitely teaches that the Hill Cumorah is in New York: “The final struggles between Nephites and Lamanites were waged in the vicinity of the Hill Cumorah, in what is now the State of New York, resulting in the destruction of the Nephites as a nation, about 400 A.D.”

For more discussion of the significance of Articles of Faith, go to 
http://bookofmormonwars.blogspot.com/2018/01/speculation-vs-certainty-james-talmage.html

We can only surmise, from what the M2C intellectuals say, that it doesn’t matter how many times the Brethren declare the New York Cumorah. The M2C intellectuals will reject the teachings of the prophets regardless.

3. Do you think the Brethren today have any intention of repudiating their predecessors just because the M2C intellectuals have?
The M2C intellectuals are proud to repudiate President Cowdery’s Letter VII and the subsequent teachings of the prophets affirming the New York Cumorah, but does that mean the Brethren today intend to follow that approach?
I doubt it.
Let’s be clear that we are not discussing Book of Mormon geography here. On that point, the Brethren have consistently explained that the Lord has not revealed the details. But that is entirely different and separate from the New York Hill Cumorah, which has been clearly and definitively taught for over 150 years.
Also, I’m not speaking for anyone else, and of course Church leaders have the authority to declare whatever the Lord wants them to, but consider what a change in course would mean.
The New York Cumorah is not an isolated, out-of-the-mainstream teaching by a single Apostle, or a concept or tradition that has a murky origin. The New York Cumorah has been declared to be a fact by many modern prophets, starting with President Oliver Cowdery.
In February, 1835, President Cowdery, the Assistant President of the Church, ordained the original Quorum of the Twelve and gave them their charge, which is available here:
A few months later, in July 1835, President Cowdery published Letter VII, one of the eight Gospel Topics essays he wrote with the assistance of Joseph Smith.
A few months after that, Joseph’s scribes copied Letter VII into his personal history.
Then, a few months later, in April 1836, President Cowdery, along with Joseph Smith, received the keys of the Priesthood from Moses, Elias, Elijah, and the Lord Himself. (D&C 110).

In addition to these fundamentally important Priesthood-related events, President Cowdery had personally visited Mormon’s depository in the Hill Cumorah in New York, so he wrote Letter VII from personal experience.

It doesn’t seem likely to me that, just because a few intellectuals at BYU/CES have decided the prophets are wrong about Cumorah, the current members of the Twelve or First Presidency would repudiate what President Cowdery taught in Letter VII. Such a course seems even less likely given that their predecessors have consistently and persistently reaffirmed Letter VII through at least 1990.
But again, that’s just my opinion.
_____
Here’s a final consideration.
Every man who holds the Melchizedek Priesthood has a Line of Authority that, by tradition, goes back to the Three Witnesses. I say by tradition, because, as Richard Turley has pointed out, the first Apostles were not necessarily all ordained by the Three Witnesses:
During that first meeting, Lyman Johnson, Brigham Young, and Heber C. Kimball were ordained by the Three Witnesses. The next day, a Sunday, Oliver “Cowdery called forwar[d] Orson Hyde, David W. Patten and Luke Johnson and proceeded to their ordination & blessing.” William E. McLellin, John F. Boynton, and William Smith were ordained the same day. On Saturday, February 21, “Parley P. Pratt was called to the stand and ordained as one of the Twelve” by Joseph Smith, David Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdery. [16]
Here is Footnote 16
[16] Kirtland High Council Minutes, 149, 151, 153–54; History of the Church, 2:187, 189–91. The record does not name who ordained each person. For B. H. Roberts’s best guess on who ordained whom, see Comprehensive History of the Church, 1:374–75n13. After the ordination, Oliver Cowdery gave Parley P. Pratt a charge, not to be confused with the one Cowdery gave to the Twelve later.
The minutes are available in the Joseph Smith Papers here: 
In turn, CHC n. 13 reads: 
13. Much interest has been manifested in the church concerning who was mouth in ordaining respectively the brethren of the first twelve. Most likely the three witnesses who ordained the apostles were mouth in the order in which they have always stood as witnesses, viz., Oliver Cowdery first, David Whitmer second, and Martin Harris, third. If they officiated in this order then Oliver Cowdery ordained Lyman E. Johnson; David Whitmer, Brigham Young; and Martin Harris, Heber C. Kimball. It has been suggested by some that the Prophet Joseph may have joined the three witnesses in ordaining the twelve and in that event would be mouth first, and therefore would have ordained Lyman E. Johnson, leaving Oliver Cowdery to ordain Brigham Young; David Whitmer, Heber C. Kimball. This, however, is not likely since but three of those who had been chosen were called up in a group at the above meeting to be ordained, one for each witness. Besides, the express language of the minutes of the proceedings is. “The three witnesses laid their hands upon each ones head and prayed separately;” that is, each ordained his man. The statement of Heber C. Kimball in the published extracts of his journal, also confirms this view of the matter. After giving the names of the twelve men chosen he says: “After having expressed our feelings on this occasion, we were severally called into the stand, and there received our ordinations, under the hands of Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris. These brethren ordained us to the apostleship and predicted many things which would come to pass.” (Times and Seasons, vol. vi, p. 868).
Of course, it doesn’t matter who acts as voice or “mouth” during an ordination. The point is, President Cowdery was not only one of the Three Witnesses, but he was the original recipient of the Melchizedek Priesthood along with Joseph Smith; he was the senior member of the First Presidency next to Joseph Smith; and he ordained the original Twelve Apostles, either individually (Orson Hyde, David W. Patten, and Luke Johnson) or as a participant in the circle.
It is also significant that President Cowdery gave several of the Twelve their blessings, and delivered the charge to them as a Quorum. You can read this here: http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/minute-book-1/162
I think that one reason why the modern prophets have so consistently affirmed Letter VII over many decades is the respect they have for President Cowdery, who delivered this famous charge to the original Twelve. Another reason is the respect they share for Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and Wilford Woodruff, who each related the accounts of President Cowdery’s visits to Mormon’s depository in the New York Hill Cumorah, visits that corroborate President Cowdery’s teachings about Cumorah. 
The likelihood of repudiating the prophets because of M2C seems even more remote when we realize that the M2C position originated with a mistake in Church history and is now based purely on confirmation bias and illusory “correspondences” between the M2C interpretation of the text and the M2C interpretation of Mayan culture.
In my view, the teachings of the prophets not only deserve our deference due to faith, but they are well corroborated by relevant archaeology, anthropology, geology, and geography.
_____

*M2C is the acronym for the Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory; i.e., the theory that the “real” hill Cumorah is somewhere in southern Mexico because the Book of Mormon events took place in Mesoamerica.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

Evidence of ancient writing in America

A lot of people have been reading an old post of mine about ancient writing in America from the bookofmormonwars blog, so I’ve added a few more details and I’m posting it here for those who don’t look at my old posts. The original of this one was posted on June 28, 2016.

The issue arises often, so it remains timely. 

_____

I keep hearing that evidence of ancient writing is critical to any proposed setting for the Book of Mormon. I’ve written about this before, but because it keeps coming up, I’ll discuss it again briefly.

Dead Sea scrolls

A common objective in negotiations, research, and debate is to frame the situation in favorable terms. In the legal profession, trial and appellate lawyers spend a lot of time creating arguments that put their clients’ position in a favorable context. Anyone who advocates something–politician, scientist, marketer, author–tries to do the same thing.

It’s no different with Book of Mormon geography. That’s why we see “requirements” or “conditions” for proposed settings that include requirements designed to frame the discussion in favor of one particular setting–the one being advocated by the proponent. That’s what the volcano requirement is. The text says nothing about volcanoes, but some scholars have imposed a requirement that a setting for the Book of Mormon must feature volcanoes. It’s a transparent tactic because the setting they favor features volcanoes.

We see this in the requirement for “headwaters” of Sidon (instead of head of Sidon) and “mountainous wilderness” which is never once mentioned in the text. There are many such examples.
_________________

The requirement that there must be evidence of writing is similar to the volcano requirement. Those who impose this requirement favor settings where there is already evidence of ancient writing, extending back to 500 BC and beyond.

There are two problems here. First, the ancient writing found is neither Hebrew nor Egyptian, so it doesn’t line up to the text.

Second, the Book of Mormon text itself not only doesn’t require evidence of ancient writing, but it says any such evidence would be destroyed.

IOW, to match up with the Book of Mormon, we would need to find evidence of an ancient civilization that included advanced features, yet left no evidence of writing behind.
________________

The text notes that Nephi and his successors kept records on metal plates, but several of the record keepers wrote very little (Jarom). Presumably more was recorded on the plates maintained by the kings (Omni 1:11), which would account for all the records that Joseph and Oliver observed in the room in the Hill Cumorah.

The text mentions two other mediums of writing: stone and impermanent material.

The sole instance of writing on stone is in Omni 1:20 “And it came to pass in the days of Mosiah, there was a large stone brought unto him with engravings on it; and he did interpret the engravings by the gift and power of God.”

This stone was a significant item for the people of Zarahemla because they were illiterate, but it is also significant because it is unique. We will not find a setting for the Book of Mormon in an area that features engraving on stones as a common practice. Stone engraving must be rare to nonexistent, except for the one stone left by Coriantumr. This is particularly noteworthy because Hebrew people knew about Moses and the 10 Commandments written on stone; presumably they would have done likewise, but the text mentions only this single stone in 1,000 years of history.

[Alma 10:2 refers to “writing which was upon the wall of the temple which was written by the finger of God.” The wall of the temple is not otherwise described; it could have been made of stone or wood or cement. But again, this was a highly unusual occurrence, which is why it was memorable enough that Amulek identified himself as a descendant of Aminadi, the man everyone knew because he interpreted the writing on the wall.]

Other than writing on plates, there is an example of a writing medium that is generally presumed to be paper or parchment. Alma 14:8 says “they also brought forth their records which contained the holy scriptures, and cast them into the fire also, that they might be burned and destroyed by fire.” This is interesting wording. The next verse says the people thrown into the fire “were consumed by fire,” but the scriptures were “burned and destroyed” by fire–not consumed. It’s not a major point, but it’s entirely possible that these records (nothing says they were possessed by lay worshippers, by the way) were also on metal plates that melted in the flames. Thus, they were burned and destroyed but not consumed. I think this is the most reasonable interpretation, but I recognize it’s also possible the records were consumed, despite what the text says.

The text never uses the terms paper, parchment, papyrus, or bark. The only medium mentioned in the text that could be used for transitory writing is skins. Because some of the dead sea scrolls were written on animal skins, it’s easy to imagine that the Nephite culture did likewise.

And that explains the problem.

Transitory writing material is difficult to preserve (even absent Fahrenheit 451 events such as in Alma 14). Even if the Nephites did write on paper, papyrus, skins, etc., could we expect the material to survive 1,000 years?

Jacob observed that the only writing that would endure was what he engraved on plates.

Jacob 4:1 “we know that the things which we write upon plates must remain; 2 But whatsoever things we write upon anything save it be upon plates must perish and vanish away; but we can write a few words upon plates, which will give our children, and also our beloved brethren, a small degree of knowledge concerning us, or concerning their fathers.”

If Jacob was engraving stones the way the Mayans did, he would not have said the engravings “must parish and vanish away.” Instead, he explained that the plates were the only form of writing that would not perish and vanish away. Any culture from which we have ancient writing that has not perished and vanished away (except for writing on metal plates) cannot therefore be the culture in which Jacob lived.

In North America, we find cultures that had sophisticated societies capable of building geometric earthworks with great precision and replication, yet any evidence of writing has perished and vanished away, just as Jacob explained.

In Mesoamerica, the opposite is true.

Storage conditions are not the only problem, of course. As early as around 420 B.C., Enos explained the Nephite records were in jeopardy. “For at the present our strugglings were vain in restoring them to the true faith. And they swore in their wrath that, if it were possible, they would destroy our records and us, and also all the traditions of our fathers.” Enos 1:14.

As late as 385 A.D., the prophet Mormon had the same concern: “having been commanded of the Lord that I should not suffer the records which had been handed down by our fathers, which were sacred, to fall into the hands of the Lamanites, (for the Lamanites would destroy them) therefore I made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni.” Mormon 6:6

Mormon hid up all the records. These are presumably the ones Joseph and Oliver saw in the room in the Hill Cumorah. (The qualifier “entrusted to me” does leave open the possibility that additional records existed, but Mormon says they Lamanites would destroy any records they could get their hands on.)

So if all the permanent records were written on metal and hidden up in Cumorah, and the only record engraven on stone was the one Coriantumr left, and to the extent the Nephites used transitory materials for some writing (as could be implied from Alma 14), that leaves nothing left for posterity to find. (Well, okay, Coriantumr’s stone may be out there somewhere, unless it was 1) destroyed, 2) lost, or 3) carted off by the Mayans who invaded around 800 A.D. before returning to Central America centuries later.)

Consequently, according to the text, there should be little if any evidence of writing among the Book of Mormon people in the time period between 600 BC and 400 A.D.

Except for the records Joseph and Oliver saw.
_____________

All of this means that the next time someone tells you there has to be evidence of ancient writing in any proposed setting for the Book of Mormon, ask, “Do you mean besides the records in the Hill Cumorah that Joseph and Olvier saw?”

Because those records are the only ones the text says would survive.

After all, that’s why we needed the Book of Mormon in the first place. It reveals history that would otherwise remain forever unknown.

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

Uncategorized

A/B test results

It turns out that the results were about 50/50, meaning about half voted for A and half for B. Many people thought they should be combined, but we want to keep it as succinct as possible.

We’re doing some revisions and I’ll post the final version here for you to share as you like.

Thanks to everyone who voted!

Source: Book of Mormon Concensus

Uncategorized

Lulling the Saints into accepting M2C

I was pondering a theme for this week’s posts when I saw this scripture at the top of our High Council agenda yesterday:

Jacob 4:10 Wherefore, brethren, seek not to counsel the Lord, but to take counsel from his hand.

That epitomizes the issues we’ll discuss in the blog this week.
_____

We are fascinated and appalled that in the Church today, certain intellectuals have succeeded in persuading CES, BYU, and the Curriculum, Missionary and Church History departments to teach the youth, missionaries, and members generally that the prophets* are wrong about the New York Cumorah. They do this to promote their M2C** theory.

Some people are uncomfortable discussing specific organizations, but it is time to get real. It is way past time to pretend this is not a serious problem, that it doesn’t matter, etc.

M2C directly impacts faith and confidence in both the prophets and the Book of Mormon itself.

As we’ve seen, Church curriculum has already been carefully edited to promote M2C. Now the Church is about to publish a version of Church history, to be translated into 14 languages, that will firmly establish M2C for future generations. The first chapters have been excerpted in the Ensign. The narrative approach is appealing and effective, and will surely help members and nonmembers alike better understand the important events and context of the Restoration of the Gospel.

However, the book will not mention Letter VII or any of the prophetic teachings about the New York Cumorah. To the extent it even acknowledges the New York Cumorah, this new version of Church history, like the editorial comments in the Joseph Smith Papers, will reinforce the M2C teaching that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ignorant speculators who misled the Church about the New York Cumorah, and that it is the efforts of the M2C intellectuals who have saved the Church from the mistakes of the prophets.

These intellectuals know their M2C theory would be rejected by the Saints if it was overt. That’s why they have utilized a variety of sophisticated techniques to lull the Saints into accepting M2C passively without even noticing what is happening.

We’ll be discussing some of these techniques this week:

1. Suppressing and censoring the words of the prophets

2. Using sophistry to teach the prophets are wrong

3. Causing confusion by conflating separate and distinct teachings of the prophets

4. Imprinting the M2C theory on the minds of vulnerable students and missionaries (and investigators) through media, artwork, displays, and academic publications

5. Dressing the new idea (M2C) in old habits to make it easier to accept.
_____

Here’s an introduction to technique #1, suppression and censorship.

The M2C intellectuals recognize that one of the biggest threats to their theory is Letter VII.*** They have concocted a variety of reasons why the Saints should disbelieve Letter VII, some of which I have addressed here: http://www.lettervii.com/2017/01/why-some-people-reject-letter-vii.html

Their arguments against Letter VII expose the cognitive dissonance the M2C intellectuals feel. Cognitive dissonance “is the mental discomfort (psychological stress) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas or values.”

We stipulate that the M2C intellectuals are faithful members of the Church, which means that, in theory, they accept the teachings of the prophets. But with Letter VII (and its context and progeny), they face the clear, unambiguous words of the prophets that contradict their theory.

The prophets and M2C cannot both be true.  Here’s how the M2C intellectuals resolve their cognitive dissonance:

M2C intellectuals at BYU/CES confront Letter VII – h/t to Scott Adams

_____

It’s important at the outset to distinguish between the M2C intellectuals and the people who have innocently relied on their teachings.

When we refer to M2C intellectuals, we mean those who are fully aware of Letter VII, its context and progeny (as well as the scientific evidence that supports Letter VII), but who nevertheless choose to reject the words of the prophets. 

BYU fantasy map
of the Book of Mormon

There are many CES/BYU teachers and Church employees who have believed and taught M2C their entire lives because they didn’t know any better. Most of them have never heard of Letter VII or the teachings of the prophets that confirm Letter VII.

When faced with the cognitive dissonance depicted in the edited Dilbert cartoon above, many CES/BYU teachers and Church employees do not reject the prophets. Instead, they reject M2C.

Once they learn about the New York Cumorah, they readily change their views to align with the teachings of the prophets about the New York Cumorah. These are not the M2C intellectuals we are discussing this week.
_____

Because Letter VII contradicts their bias, M2C intellectuals realize their arguments against believing the prophets are, to say the least, problematic in at least two ways:

(i) Most Church members are uncomfortable with teachings that directly repudiate the prophets, so when they realize what M2C is really teaching, they reject M2C.

(ii) Even when Church members follow the M2C intellectuals instead of the prophets, they are left with uncomfortable cognitive dissonance.

The M2C intellectuals know they can resolve both problems by simply keeping the people ignorant of the existence of Letter VII.

This technique isn’t new. It’s not unique to M2C intellectuals. But it is highly effective.

On p. 249 of his book, Closing of the American Mind, Allan Bloom explains how this technique works. “The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable…”

We’ve documented in this blog plenty of examples of how the M2C citation cartel (BYU Studies, the Interpreter, Book of Mormon Central, FairMormon, BMAF, Meridian Magazine, etc.) actively implement the technique exposed by Bloom in this passage. Members of the M2C citation cartel steadfastly remove the awareness of other possibilities by refusing to educate readers about the teachings of the prophets regarding the New York Cumorah. 

The M2C intellectuals have not yet succeeded in completely erasing Letter VII from Church history. Fortunately, Joseph Smith had his scribes copy Letter VII into his personal history as part of his life story, so anyone can read it in the Joseph Smith Papers at this link:
http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1834-1836/90

But the editorial commentary goes out of its way to obscure the significance of Letter VII, as we’ve discussed before.

Nevertheless, because some Church members still read actual Church history and not merely the sanitized versions published by M2C intellectuals, the M2C citation cartel has had to “make it seem inconceivable that the New York Cumorah is viable.” That’s a separate technique we’ll discuss later.

(Recall that the M2C objection to the New York Cumorah is a corner these intellectuals have painted themselves into. It is the M2C proponents themselves who insist a New York Cumorah is inconsistent with a Mesoamerican setting. The prophets have definitely taught that Cumorah is in New York, but they have just as definitely taught that the rest of Book of Mormon geography is a matter of ongoing study, consideration, and future revelation. There is no reason, based on the teachings of the prophets alone, that the New York Cumorah must be rejected to support a Mesoamerican setting.)
_____

Let’s return to the teachings of Jacob in Chapter 4. Think about this in the context of Letter VII and the many confirmations of the New York Cumorah by the prophets over the decades, including members of the First Presidency speaking in General Conference.

Then compare the clarity of the New York Cumorah with the confusing teachings of the M2C intellectuals who reject these plain teachings of the prophets.

13 Behold, my brethren, he that prophesieth, let him prophesy to the understanding of men; for the Spirit speaketh the truth and lieth not. Wherefore, it speaketh of things as they really are, and of things as they really will be; wherefore, these things are manifested unto us plainly, for the salvation of our souls. But behold, we are not witnesses alone in these things; for God also spake them unto prophets of old.

14 But behold, the Jews were a stiffnecked people; and they despised the words of plainness, and killed the prophets, and sought for things that they could not understand. Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble.

Now, consider how the M2C intellectuals despise the words of plainness in Letter VII, and how M2C has introduced complexity and sophistry into what had long been a simple, clear teaching about the New York Cumorah. These M2C intellectuals and the CES/BYU teachers who follow them are imprinting the minds of our youth and missionaries with a fantasy map of the Book of Mormon that declares Cumorah cannot be in New York.

M2C intellectuals look beyond the mark of the New York Cumorah to pursue a futile search for Cumorah in southern Mexico. 

_____

* For brevity sake, I refer to the apostles as prophets instead of their full title: prophet, seer and revelator.

**M2C is the acronym for Mesoamerican/two-Cumorahs theory, which is the idea that the “hill in New York” where Joseph found the plates was mis-named Cumorah because the “real Cumorah” of Mormon 6:6 and Ether 15:11 is somewhere in southern Mexico (or Baja, or Panama, or Chile, etc.) instead of New York. The intellectuals explain away the words of the prophets by teaching the youth that there are actually “two Cumorahs,” consisting of a false one in New York and a real one in southern Mexico.

***Letter VII is the seventh of eight essays (the first Gospel Topics essays) written by President Oliver Cowdery with the assistance of Joseph Smith. In Letter VII, President Cowdery declares it is a fact that the final battles of the Jaredites and Nephites took place in the mile-wide valley of the Hill Cumorah in New York. This, President Cowdery declared, is the same hill from which Joseph obtained the plates from Moroni’s stone-and-cement box. It is the same hill that contained Mormon’s depository of Nephite records (Mormon 6:6), which President Cowdery knew because he and Joseph had visited that depository multiple times.

Source: Book of Mormon Wars

Uncategorized

The Tragedy of Palmyra

The world was shocked and devastated by the Tragedy of Palmyra, Syria, when ISIS destroyed UNESCO World Heritage sites there to erase history they disapproved of.

Members of the Church should be just as shocked and devastated by what has happened in Palmyra, New York, as the history of the hill Cumorah has been erased from the site.
_____ 
In Palmyra, Syria, the destruction of history has been well documented.

In Palmyra, New York, the destruction of history has not yet been well documented. But next week, we’re going to look at how it has taken place and what the repercussions are.
Before – Cumorah/Ramah
After – Mesoamerica in New York!

Source: Book of Mormon Wars